In episode 5 of Civil Banter, our hosts Hamish Mills and Stanford Cummings dig into some of the trickier parts of personal injury litigation – especially how general damages are assessed, and how the courtroom experience has shifted since the rise of virtual hearings.
Assessing General Damages: The Case of Ramcharran
The core of the episode centres on a personal injury case: Ramcharranv. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company. Hamish walks listeners through the facts of the case in a segment they call “The Reasonable Stan,” where Stanford estimates the amount of general damages (pain and suffering) awarded by the jury.
The plaintiff was injured in a parking lot collision while reading papers in his car. The at-fault driver fled the scene. While the impact was relatively minor, it aggravated a pre-existing—but asymptomatic—elbow injury. Despite treatment including surgery, the plaintiff continued to experience pain and reduced strength in his dominant hand, affecting his ability to return to work as a butcher.
The jury ultimately awarded $62,250 in general damages. However, due to Ontario’s statutory deductible, the plaintiff’s net compensation was reduced to $17,800 (an issue the hosts promise to explore further in a future episode).
The Virtual Courtroom: Pros, Cons, and What We’ve Lost
Next up, our hosts examine how civil litigation has evolved in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly the move from in-person to virtual proceedings.
Benefits of virtual hearings include:
- Lower costs and fewer disbursements for clients
- More efficient use of time for lawyers and parties
- Improved access to justice for self-represented litigants
- Geographic flexibility in lawyer-client relationships
However, they also highlight some key losses:
- Fewer opportunities for junior lawyers to observe courtroom dynamics and learn advocacy by watching senior counsel
- Reduced face-to-face interaction between opposing counsel, which can hinder efficient settlements
- Less effective judicial pressure to resolve matters in the hallway, a common dynamic in in-person hearings
- Lower success rates in virtual mediations compared to in-person ones, particularly in high-stakes or emotionally charged disputes
The consensus? Virtual proceedings offer real value but aren’t always the right fit, especially when it comes to settlement-focused events like mediations and pre-trials. The hosts suggest that a hybrid model, where simpler matters remain virtual and complex or high-stakes ones return in person, may strike the right balance.
A Call for Mentorship and Observation
Perhaps one of the most thoughtful takeaways is the importance of learning by watching. The hosts reflect on how early courtroom experiences – especially express motions courts – offered junior lawyers a crash course in oral advocacy, legal decorum, and quick thinking. Those opportunities are harder to come by in a virtual setting, where proceedings often happen behind closed screens.
Both hosts agree: making space for junior lawyers to observe proceedings, even virtually, is key to fostering the next generation of skilled litigators.
If you have questions about personal injury claims, court procedures, or navigating the litigation process, reach out to our team at info@nelliganlaw.ca or email us at civilbanter@nelliganlaw.ca.
